List statuses you bookmarked

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that bookmarks are private, which is useful conceptual context but not a distinct behavioral characteristic such as pagination, ordering, or authentication requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediately adds the privacy distinction. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list tool with two fully documented parameters and robust safety annotations, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing. The privacy caveat closes the main conceptual gap versus favourites, and the schema handles all operational details.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%. Both params, limit and account, already have rich descriptions including defaults, bounds, matching rules, and fallback behavior. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Statuses a connected account has bookmarked.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_favourites by noting bookmarks are private, which is the key differentiator among the similarly named tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context for when to use this tool — listing statuses bookmarked by a connected account — and explicitly contrasts with favourites. It does not name the sibling tool get_favourites directly, but the 'unlike favourites' comparison effectively routes the agent away from the most likely alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.